• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

Tony the Tigger

Premium Member
Advertisement
Listen, kid, it's really simple. You ranted like a lunatic about slapping the Statue of Liberty and giving a bigto immigrants because of this wall. You're literally comparing a POINT OF ENTRY THAT REQUIRES DOCUMENTATION AND PROCESSING to a massive space where God knows who and what came come across. You're comparing apples to almonds.

And yeah I think it will deter people. Didn't you watch CNN's little monkey, Jim Acosta, show us that there weren't people trying to get through that slatted fence? True, it might be because Trump was there and it would bring too much attention, but even those WHO WORK the border were supporting Trump's claims to a point.

Next, there's not a single thing you can tell me about illegals. I've not only worked with them, I've LIVED with some in Scranton, PA. Here's how it works, high speed. They're paid lower wages by the employer because he/she knows he/she can get away with it. He/She provides lodging for the workers at a ridiculous rate in which he/she crams them into the housing like sardines. The money that isn't spent on beer and food goes back home. So that perfect little scenario that you think happens due to illegal labor isn't so perfect. The owner gets over on Americans, not just financially but also by holding jobs that should go to natural citizens and/or legal immigrants.

And just because the line is long to get in the right way doesn't mean you sneak across without being vetted/documented. It's that simple. If we walked out of that same Publix without paying because the line was too long and another one didn't open, it would be shoplifting, aka a crime. Same scenario here.

Just to add, did you notice that many of the Mexican residents as well as the local government didn't want that caravan there? That's why this whole issue started, right, because of that caravan. So what does it tell you when THEY didn't want them there?
"Listen, kid?"

Stopped reading right there. Take a walk.
 

aw14

Well-Known Member
I like you, Buddy, so I'll be totally civil with you. We could go through dozens of statements from candidates that would contradict present day actions/feelings. And we also know that Democrats have been fully vested in combatting Trump since day one. Case in point: people are bringing up this statement from 2013. However, if he uses any methods he can to bypass Congress, he's a dictator and tyrant. So which one do the people want him to be? The guy who falls back on his words or the guy who has absolute power?



“We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States,” Obama said in the 31-second clip. “But those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law.”

He added: “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently and lawfully to become immigrants into this country.” - Obama in 2005


“Real reform means strong border security, and we can build on the progress my administration has already made -- putting more boots on the Southern border than at any time in our history and reducing illegal crossings to their lowest levels in 40 years,” Obama said.
“Real reform means establishing a responsible pathway to earned citizenship -- a path that includes passing a background check, paying taxes and a meaningful penalty, learning English, and going to the back of the line behind the folks trying to come here legally,” he added. - Obama in 2013




“The American people are fundamentally pro-legal immigration and anti-illegal immigration,” Schumer said during a talk at Georgetown University. “We will only pass comprehensive reform when we recognize this fundamental concept,” he added, listing seven principles of any immigration reform.
“First, illegal immigration is wrong,” Schumer stated, “and a primary goal of comprehensive immigration reform must be to dramatically curtail future illegal immigration.” - Chuck Schumer in 2009




“Do we have a commitment to secure the border? Yes. What are the options that we have available to us, let's make sure they work,” Pelosi said.
“Because we do need to address the issue of immigration and the challenge we have of undocumented people in our country. We certainly do not want any more coming in.” - Nancy Pelosi in 2008





“The president is desperate to change the subject from health care to immigration because he knows that health care is the number one issue Americans care about,” their statement read. - Chuck and Nancy in 2019.



I don't claim to know what the happy medium is to satisfy everyone, but it's obvious that Trump isn't the only one whose words can come back to bite him but he's the only one the media focuses on.
Well laid out. Many here don’t seem to understand or care about the gross hypocrisy of the elected leaders in the left.

They should be held accountable for their flip/flopping on this issue, as should anyone on the right on any issue as well.

A few pages back, I provided multiple links about wasteful government spending, which illustrates how in a governmental budget, $5b is not exorbitant. Amazingly, no one addressed it. Why? It’s not the cost they are concerned with. It’s just Trump. Orange man bad equals no wall. Plain and simple.

That said- had Obama presented this, the dems would be all in and the republicans would say- big eared man bad, so no wall.
 

seascape

Well-Known Member
Well laid out. Many here don’t seem to understand or care about the gross hypocrisy of the elected leaders in the left.

They should be held accountable for their flip/flopping on this issue, as should anyone on the right on any issue as well.

A few pages back, I provided multiple links about wasteful government spending, which illustrates how in a governmental budget, $5b is not exorbitant. Amazingly, no one addressed it. Why? It’s not the cost they are concerned with. It’s just Trump. Orange man bad equals no wall. Plain and simple.

That said- had Obama presented this, the dems would be all in and the republicans would say- big eared man bad, so no wall.
You are incorrect because Republican asked Obama for the wall and offered him a deal, wall for Dreamers. Obama said no. He also said it would be unconstitutional for the President to take sole action on the Dreamers before he did it anyway.

In any case all these political games need to end. Congress must approve 5 billion for the wall and pay 1.1 billion for work not done for each week this partial shut down goes on. 3.3 billion total so far. Soon we will be wasting more money than the wall would cost. The deal should be done. Dreamers, long term illegal alliances, the wall and the new rail tunnel for NYC. The deal is out there, approve it now. Congress pass the deal and Trump will sign it. In the mean time there is no bill for the President to sign. The longer this goes on the more damage to federal workers and all because Nancy and Schumer refuse to vote for something they voted for in the past. Further if Nancy really believes walls are immoral why has she not proposed tearing down the wall which is working between California and Mexico? Is California special because she represents a California district??? Must be true since she voted for it but now says not one dollar more to protect another state.
 

The Mom

Moderator
Premium Member
I guess it's time for another reminder about civility. Personal attacks, laughing emoticons in response to a post, and addressing people in a belittling way (calling an adult kid, sweetie, or any other name/phrase that is meant to be insulting) will not be tolerated. Please think carefully before hitting that reply tab - if there is any question about whether it is insulting/condescending/inappropriate/or otherwise likely to provoke an argument (rather than debate/discussion) please don't post it. Thank you.
 

The Mom

Moderator
Premium Member
I'm not sure why that is so hard to believe, given the stats on how many people in the country overall are living paycheck to paycheck.
My husband and I went through periods in our lives both before and after marriage where a missed paycheck would cause major problems paying rent, etc. It is not uncommon, especially early in life. Once we reached middle-age it was no longer an issue, but we weren't, and aren't, the only people who struggled/struggle in their 20s/30s.
 

aw14

Well-Known Member
You are incorrect because Republican asked Obama for the wall and offered him a deal, wall for Dreamers. Obama said no. He also said it would be unconstitutional for the President to take sole action on the Dreamers before he did it anyway.

In any case all these political games need to end. Congress must approve 5 billion for the wall and pay 1.1 billion for work not done for each week this partial shut down goes on. 3.3 billion total so far. Soon we will be wasting more money than the wall would cost. The deal should be done. Dreamers, long term illegal alliances, the wall and the new rail tunnel for NYC. The deal is out there, approve it now. Congress pass the deal and Trump will sign it. In the mean time there is no bill for the President to sign. The longer this goes on the more damage to federal workers and all because Nancy and Schumer refuse to vote for something they voted for in the past. Further if Nancy really believes walls are immoral why has she not proposed tearing down the wall which is working between California and Mexico? Is California special because she represents a California district??? Must be true since she voted for it but now says not one dollar more to protect another state.
I agree with you that a deal must be done. Likely as you suggest. Where we disagree, is this is the same senator Obama who voted for the border fence. As I said in my previous post that you quoted, folks need to be held accountable for their flip-flopping.
 

Willmark

Well-Known Member
I agree with you that a deal must be done. Likely as you suggest. Where we disagree, is this is the same senator Obama who voted for the border fence. As I said in my previous post that you quoted, folks need to be held accountable for their flip-flopping.
Won’t ever happen, they’ll claim “they evolved their thinking” or some other nonsense.

I’m fine (to a degree) if someone changes their mind. Just don’t sit there like “What? Who? me?” Like it never happened.
 
Last edited:

gsam4ever

Well-Known Member
Well laid out. Many here don’t seem to understand or care about the gross hypocrisy of the elected leaders in the left.

They should be held accountable for their flip/flopping on this issue, as should anyone on the right on any issue as well.

A few pages back, I provided multiple links about wasteful government spending, which illustrates how in a governmental budget, $5b is not exorbitant. Amazingly, no one addressed it. Why? It’s not the cost they are concerned with. It’s just Trump. Orange man bad equals no wall. Plain and simple.

That said- had Obama presented this, the dems would be all in and the republicans would say- big eared man bad, so no wall.
1) it is going to cost way more than $5 billion. At what threshold does it become to much for you?

2) No we wouldn’t be for the wall under Obama but since we will never know it’s a silly argument that proves nothing.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
It doesn’t fit her narrative.
What doesn’t? My opinion that I don’t think the majority of these workers are helpless and going to be left destitute?
Or that in my 20s/early 30s I had more disposable income than I do now?

I don’t know if the majority of people affected, have any kind of savings at all.. but I would think a lot do.

On the other hand, a few people here are speaking as if it would be impossible to have any type of savings. As if they know it as fact.
 

gsam4ever

Well-Known Member
I guess it's time for another reminder about civility. Personal attacks, laughing emoticons in response to a post, and addressing people in a belittling way (calling an adult kid, sweetie, or any other name/phrase that is meant to be insulting) will not be tolerated. Please think carefully before hitting that reply tab - if there is any question about whether it is insulting/condescending/inappropriate/or otherwise likely to provoke an argument (rather than debate/discussion) please don't post it. Thank you.
Wait we can’t use laughing emoticons. Does 21stamps know this??? I mean she ends every post with one.
 

gsam4ever

Well-Known Member
What doesn’t? My opinion that I don’t think the majority of these workers are helpless and going to be left destitute?
Or that in my 20s/early 30s I had more disposable income than I do now?

I don’t know if the majority of people affected, have any kind of savings at all.. but I would think a lot do.

On the other hand, a few people here are speaking as if it would be impossible to have any type of savings. As if they know it as fact.
Again no one ever said that’s it’s impossible for federal workers to have a savings. Just you so you can argue with everyone on here. Now go engage with someone else as you I can’t do it with you when you make things up.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Again no one ever said that’s it’s impossible for federal workers to have a savings. Just you so you can argue with everyone on here. Now go engage with someone else as you I can’t do it with you when you make things up.
You just said that it doesn’t fit “her narrative”, speaking about me.

Oh good lord,. I can’t use emoji.. so I’ll just say- Hope you have a wonderful Sunday.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
State (and local) spending on education is a separate thing from IDEA spending, which is federal - meant to help cover the costs that special education services incur above and beyond the cost it takes to educate a neurotypical student.

In Texas if we didn't spend a fortune on illegals we would have more than enough money for other programs and reduce our dependency on federal money and expensive mandates. Why even teachers could get long overdue pay raises.

Using the proposed funding for the wall as an excuse for not funding other programs is a hard logic to follow considering the massive federal budget.
 

aw14

Well-Known Member
1) it is going to cost way more than $5 billion. At what threshold does it become to much for you?

2) No we wouldn’t be for the wall under Obama but since we will never know it’s a silly argument that proves nothing.
1) depends honestly. Where else are we wasting? How much is being spent on other programs where illegal immigrants are a major financial focal point.
2) maybe you wouldn’t. Pelosi and he crew- I have no doubt would be.

Hell, Schumer’s own quotes have been used here to show he was fine with it. It’s just Trump
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
In Texas if we didn't spend a fortune on illegals we would have more than enough money for other programs and reduce our dependency on federal money and expensive mandates. Why even teachers could get long overdue pay raises.

Using the proposed funding for the wall as an excuse for not funding other programs is a hard logic to follow considering the massive federal budget.
Do they (Texas in this case) have approximate numbers of what is currently being spent?
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
My husband and I went through periods in our lives both before and after marriage where a missed paycheck would cause major problems paying rent, etc. It is not uncommon, especially early in life. Once we reached middle-age it was no longer an issue, but we weren't, and aren't, the only people who struggled/struggle in their 20s/30s.
Exactly. And additionally, many of these government workers have security clearances. Incurring debt - especially by having unpaid bills - can be problematic for security clearances.
 
Top Bottom